What do you think?
Rate this book
Living Fossils
48 pages, Hardcover
First published September 30, 1991
1 person want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
June 24, 2025
I am honestly more than a bit frustrated that far too many geared towards younger readers books about and describing living fossils seem to end up presenting texts that start out strongly but ultimately end up with far too many informational gaps or with featured contents that is at best a bit questionable regarding scientific accuracy (and in particular with regard to labelling featured species and classes of plants and animals as living fossils but also leaving out and ignoring others that most definitely are generally considered to be living fossils).
And sadly, Joyce Pope's 1991 middle grade non fiction picture book Living Fossils also falls very loudly and solidly into the above category, since yes, what she has penned about living fossils, whilst definitely interesting, also does at least in my humble opinion include some facts and some assertions by her that should most definitely at best be taken with large grains of proverbial salt. Because while in Living Fossils Pope should certainly be accoladed for at the beginning of her book giving a very reasonable, easy to understand and logical explanation of what living fossils are (and thankfully without straying into the realm of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution), including both plants and animal species and groups and pointing out that today, many of the earth's most famous living fossils (such as for example the coelacanth fish, turtles and tortoises, sharks and also many living fossil tree species) are not only considered to be rare but are also increasingly threatened and endangered because of us, because of fishing, hunting, logging, pollution etc.), I do have to shake my head a bit regarding some of Joyce Pope's inclusions in Living Fossils and some obvious and not all that understandable omissions.
I mean, considering that cockroaches have not changed almost AT ALL for more than three hundred million years (except that today's cockroaches are much smaller in size than in the past) and are considered by most scientists (by both palaeontologists and entomologists) not only as living fossils but also as one of the most successful species of animals to have ever inhabited the earth (much much older than dinosaurs), why does Joyce Pope not even once mention cockroaches in Living Fossils, and why does she in the section on fish also ignore living fossil jawless fishes like the hagfish or the lamprey (really academically problematic in my opinion and I sure hope that the non inclusion of both modern jalwless fishes and cockroaches in Living Fossils is not because they cockroaches, hagfishes and lampreys considered too "disgusting" to write about by Joyce Pope).
Furthermore, I also do not really understand why the monotremes, why egg laying mammals like the platypus and the spiny anteater of Australia, which from fossilised specimens have not changed for more than one hundred million years are not considered to be living fossils by Pope and are thus of course and frustratingly not featured in Living Fossils, but the Okapi is (even though at best the Okapi has not canged for a couple of million years and certainly does not have the long time span of over a hunndred million years that the monotremes demonstrate).
Combined with the fact that Joyce Pope also and sadly seems to think that providing a bibliography and an acknowledgment of her sources for Living Fossils is somehow not neccessary, albeit that I have certainly found parts of Pope's featured contents interesting, on the whole, there are too many academically suspect issues regarding what is being tectually presented in Living Fossils for me to consider more than two stars.
And sadly, Joyce Pope's 1991 middle grade non fiction picture book Living Fossils also falls very loudly and solidly into the above category, since yes, what she has penned about living fossils, whilst definitely interesting, also does at least in my humble opinion include some facts and some assertions by her that should most definitely at best be taken with large grains of proverbial salt. Because while in Living Fossils Pope should certainly be accoladed for at the beginning of her book giving a very reasonable, easy to understand and logical explanation of what living fossils are (and thankfully without straying into the realm of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution), including both plants and animal species and groups and pointing out that today, many of the earth's most famous living fossils (such as for example the coelacanth fish, turtles and tortoises, sharks and also many living fossil tree species) are not only considered to be rare but are also increasingly threatened and endangered because of us, because of fishing, hunting, logging, pollution etc.), I do have to shake my head a bit regarding some of Joyce Pope's inclusions in Living Fossils and some obvious and not all that understandable omissions.
I mean, considering that cockroaches have not changed almost AT ALL for more than three hundred million years (except that today's cockroaches are much smaller in size than in the past) and are considered by most scientists (by both palaeontologists and entomologists) not only as living fossils but also as one of the most successful species of animals to have ever inhabited the earth (much much older than dinosaurs), why does Joyce Pope not even once mention cockroaches in Living Fossils, and why does she in the section on fish also ignore living fossil jawless fishes like the hagfish or the lamprey (really academically problematic in my opinion and I sure hope that the non inclusion of both modern jalwless fishes and cockroaches in Living Fossils is not because they cockroaches, hagfishes and lampreys considered too "disgusting" to write about by Joyce Pope).
Furthermore, I also do not really understand why the monotremes, why egg laying mammals like the platypus and the spiny anteater of Australia, which from fossilised specimens have not changed for more than one hundred million years are not considered to be living fossils by Pope and are thus of course and frustratingly not featured in Living Fossils, but the Okapi is (even though at best the Okapi has not canged for a couple of million years and certainly does not have the long time span of over a hunndred million years that the monotremes demonstrate).
Combined with the fact that Joyce Pope also and sadly seems to think that providing a bibliography and an acknowledgment of her sources for Living Fossils is somehow not neccessary, albeit that I have certainly found parts of Pope's featured contents interesting, on the whole, there are too many academically suspect issues regarding what is being tectually presented in Living Fossils for me to consider more than two stars.
December 24, 2016
(for the illustrations by Helen Ward)
Nothing special, it is what it is. In fact, it's a little less than that, because the book design makes it harder to read even than the busy Eyewitness books. Too dense. Art sometimes illustrated the modern animals, sometimes the ancestors, photos also inconsistent in the same manner. Each critter, each page spread, was a new challenge to decipher, in other words.
Still, if an upper-primary student does have an interest in sharks, tarsiers, tuataras, etc., he'll probably enjoy this.
Nothing special, it is what it is. In fact, it's a little less than that, because the book design makes it harder to read even than the busy Eyewitness books. Too dense. Art sometimes illustrated the modern animals, sometimes the ancestors, photos also inconsistent in the same manner. Each critter, each page spread, was a new challenge to decipher, in other words.
Still, if an upper-primary student does have an interest in sharks, tarsiers, tuataras, etc., he'll probably enjoy this.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews